A Famous man once said "He who is willing to give up a little liberty for a little security deserves neither and shall lose both."I personally think he was right.Regards all,Dick

Tell that to those who lost their lives on 9/11 or their legs at the Boston marathon. What we really need is the proper balance. Those who scream the loudest about government surveillance will demand to know why the government did not "connect the dots" after the next attack occurs - especially if it directly involves them or their families.

A Famous man once said "He who is willing to give up a little liberty for a little security deserves neither and shall lose both."I personally think he was right.Regards all,Dick

Tell that to those who lost their lives on 9/11 or their legs at the Boston marathon. What we really need is the proper balance. Those who scream the loudest about government surveillance will demand to know why the government did not "connect the dots" after the next attack occurs - especially if it directly involves them or their families.

It's pretty obvious that, if the NSA director is lying to congress about the programs they have in operation, that the proper balance has not been achieved. We shouldn't be so quick to assume good faith when it comes to the activities of our watchers, because we have no idea what they are really up to.

The fact that the surveillance is contracted out also leads to more concerns both in terms of controlling the scope of surveillance as well as the number of agents with access. Snowden had patriotic intentions, imagine if a McCarthy, bin Laden, or Timothy McVeigh type were able to wield the tool...

here is an recent email exchange between a former GOP Senator and Edward Snowden - both say things that are important for us to hear and that the mainstream media isn't publishing:

A Famous man once said "He who is willing to give up a little liberty for a little security deserves neither and shall lose both."I personally think he was right.

Tell that to those who lost their lives on 9/11 or their legs at the Boston marathon. What we really need is the proper balance. Those who scream the loudest about government surveillance will demand to know why the government did not "connect the dots" after the next attack occurs - especially if it directly involves them or their families.

It's pretty obvious that, if the NSA director is lying to congress about the programs they have in operation, that the proper balance has not been achieved. We shouldn't be so quick to assume good faith when it comes to the activities of our watchers, because we have no idea what they are really up to.

It all comes down to this--if we kept our noses out of the things that other countries are doing that do not affect us in the least, a lot of the things we're worrying about wouldn't come to pass. But no, the US has to stick their nose into things that don't concern them. How else did we get the reputation that we now have in this world--nosey busybodies that have to be involved and impose our will on others--whether we're right or wrong.

It's pretty obvious that, if the NSA director is lying to congress about the programs they have in operation, that the proper balance has not been achieved. We shouldn't be so quick to assume good faith when it comes to the activities of our watchers, because we have no idea what they are really up to.

All those who think that Congress will keep our secrets, raise your hand.

NSA HAS to lie to Congress! Especially in an open and monitored meeting! You people HAVE got to start thinking!!

The real problem is that to ensure 'security' of the country, government has to know what is happening in the world - and cannot, necessarily, let every body know what is happening. It was radio monitoring that enabled a victory at the battle of Midway and the victory over the U boats in 1943.

So some covert monitoring is necessary - even of citizens. The question is 'How far can it go without being responsible to an outside agency?' Look at the current controversy over the tax affairs of tea party groups - where would NSA monitoring and IRS interference be co-ordinated and used illegally? Difficult one - suppose it was a political group lobbying for changes in middle east policy while covertly supporting a terrorist group and diverting funds? Then can you trust the government? The latest trial in Russia raises that question: could it happen in the West?

No doubt governments act in what they consider is 'the best interests of the people'. Which is why Tony Blair lied to the British people and parliament over Iraq - and G.W. Bush lied about torture at Guantanamo.

But what the politicians do is really controlled by the civil servants, and the reality is that 'we the people' have no real control......Whether we like it or not.

It's pretty obvious that, if the NSA director is lying to congress about the programs they have in operation, that the proper balance has not been achieved. We shouldn't be so quick to assume good faith when it comes to the activities of our watchers, because we have no idea what they are really up to.

All those who think that Congress will keep our secrets, raise your hand.

NSA HAS to lie to Congress! Especially in an open and monitored meeting! You people HAVE got to start thinking!!

That's just silly. If things continue the way you want them to, there will never be any effective oversight of any program at any level of classification. And with the improper use of classification as a cover for illegal activities - which happens with regularity - how is anybody supposed to just put their trust and faith in the existing system?

It's pretty obvious that, if the NSA director is lying to congress about the programs they have in operation, that the proper balance has not been achieved. We shouldn't be so quick to assume good faith when it comes to the activities of our watchers, because we have no idea what they are really up to.

All those who think that Congress will keep our secrets, raise your hand.

NSA HAS to lie to Congress! Especially in an open and monitored meeting! You people HAVE got to start thinking!!

That's just silly. If things continue the way you want them to, there will never be any effective oversight of any program at any level of classification. And with the improper use of classification as a cover for illegal activities - which happens with regularity - how is anybody supposed to just put their trust and faith in the existing system?

Faith is for church, not for the government.

i have yet to find the church with which my faith is completely resonant. but to your point, what really should concern us is the very real possibility that these surveillance systems make us LESS safe. Imagine if Snowden had not been concerned about this being unAmerican & unConstitutional in terms of the 4th ammendment -- imagine if a double agent for al qaeda got a hold of it.

won't greed inevitably corrupt contracted out defense programs be they for surveillance or anything else? there is money in war not peace for these myopic private interests.

quote: There isn't a government document somewhere titled, "The Plan to Destroy Global Privacy," but that is exactly what Western intelligence agencies will do if adequately funded and left, unopposed, to their own devices. Anyone who can't see that hasn't adequately grappled with the implications of Snowden's revelations, the history of spy agencies allowed to operate in secret, or the radical new capabilities that advances in data analysis and retention have given states (and are likely to give them in the near future if they aren't stopped). end quote source: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/07/the-problem-with-the-privacy-moderates/277561/

However, after what we've seen with the targeting of certain moderate thinking groups it isn't a stretch that this administration would endeavor to use NSA intelligence to further their agenda.

there is absolutely no evidence the Obama administration was behind the IRS targeting Tea Party groups that were trying to get tax exemptions. it's just a lot of hearsay and innuendo like the bs that circulated about Sadaam having anything to do with al qaeda or 9-1-1. he did not, but many Americans still mistakenly think he did. Rush Limbaugh and some politicians make a living on the fact that a lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is still putting its boots on (as Mark twain once quipped).

Bush Cheney started this mess with the Patriot Act, which both parties failed to stand up to. Unfortunately when it comes to war and surveillance Obama seems a lot like Dick Cheney in his willingness to circumvent the Constitution in the name of 'security'.

Copyright 2000-2017 eHam.net, LLC
eHam.net is a community web site for amateur (ham) radio operators around the world.
Contact the site with comments or questions.
WEBMASTER@EHAM.NETSite Privacy Statement